Aryan95614/aerograph-asrs huggingface dataset:
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Phase of flight: Cruise; Descent
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

At FL200 in cruise to ZZZ; we were experiencing continuous moderate turbulence for the majority of the flight. The seat belt sign was on and the FAs (Flight Attendants) were seated when we suddenly experienced severe/extreme turbulence 50 miles NE of ZZZ1. The event lasted approximately 20 seconds and we encountered airspeed deviations of +/- 20 knots and altitude deviations of +/- 200 feet. The aircraft was briefly uncontrollable. We were maintaining 270 knots when we experienced this encounter. We did not experience any indications of an over-speed. During this encounter we immediately made a report with ATC and were cleared to descend to 17;000 MSL. We then confirmed the safety of our FAs and passengers and then sent a message to Dispatch via ACARS.We then continued in moderate turbulence and began a descent into ZZZ. At 13;000 feet over ZZZ2 we experienced approximately 10-15 seconds of severe/extreme turbulence again; made the notification to ATC and again confirmed everyone was stilled seated. We received reports from the preceeding aircraft on the approach into ZZZ; which indicated occasional moderate turbulence and a ceiling of approximately 1;000 feet. We continued the approach and landing at ZZZ with no further incident and immediately contacted Dispatch and Maintenance Control at the gate. EMB-175 Captain reported severe turbulence encounter resulting in momentary loss of control.
Aircraft: COMMERCIAL FIXED WING
Phase of flight: Initial Approach
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach

During approach to Runway 31L in visual conditions we became task saturated and failed to configure the aircraft by 1;000 AGL. We executed a go-around in response to the late configuration. During the visual go-around we leveled at 2;000 feet and ATC advised the minimum vectoring altitude was 3;000 feet so we initiated a climb to 3000 feet. Late configuration. Did not set altitude pre-select to the published missed approach altitude.Earlier configuration and reference the published missed approach altitude on the approach plate being used for the backup. Air carrier Captain reported that the aircraft was not properly configured for approach to PSP airport and a go-around was conducted. During the go-around; ATC advised that they had leveled off below minimum vectoring altitude.
Aircraft: MD-82
Phase of flight: Descent
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Approaching HOWDY on the WHINY 1 arrival the runway assignment was given. Upon selecting the new runway and transition the GFMS went into heading Hold. The aircraft proceeded past HOWDY maybe a mile; then we asked for a vector and told them we were unable to comply with the altitudes at VANCO. We were then given a vector and altitude; proceeded on into an approach to 36R. While loading the Arrival/transition/runway/transition this late in the game increased the workload to the point where we did not notice the aircraft went into heading hold until past HOWDY. Runway assignment on low visibility days should be given to MD80's early. The aircraft systems are not meant to fly Star arrivals with tight restrictions and FMS systems that do not easily accept changes. To change the runway is easy; to change the arrival/ transition/runway/transition then close discontinuities to fly the arrival is too much late in the arrival. Software issues should be resolved. MD80 pilot reported a change in runway assignment approaching HOWDY on the WHINY1 arrival. The aircraft went into heading mode after the changes were initiated and not immediately detected by the crew. A track deviation occurred and the VANCO crossing restriction was missed.
Aircraft: SMALL AIRCRAFT; HIGH WING; 1 ENG; FIXED GEAR
Phase of flight: Initial Climb
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT

We were climbing via the North Town Three Departure. Around 3;000 feet we contacted departure. ATC (Las Vegas Departure) gave us a new altimeter setting from 30.03 to 30.00 and then proceeded with the following clearance. Aircraft X; fly straight out; climb maintain 9;000 feet. Our current altitude was approximately 3;800 feet before reaching the LAS R-313 so we were still heading westerly towards terrain and not established on the LAS R313 outbound. Student noted how strange it was for ATC to vector us this low and close to terrain. Moment later; ATC gave us a low altitude alert and suggested a right turn to 090. Then ATC proceeded about a possible ATC deviation and to call a number.Confusion between what ATC meant to say and what pilots actually did. The clearance 'fly straight out' was filled with ambiguity (was still flying westerly and not heading northwest on published procedure and was perceived as a vector for climb. Before pilots had a chance to request clarification; low altitude alert was issued. A pilot and instructor were confused by the updated clearance provided by ATC that appeared to direct them towards rising terrain. Before the crew could question the clearance; ATC provided an low altitude alert along with notice of a possible pilot deviation.
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical

I was the Pilot-in-Command. While descending we received multiple aircraft failures including an IC600-1 failure; AHRS 1 failure; Autopilot failure; Yaw Damper failure; SPS Advance EICAS Caution message and other associated failures resulting from the IC600-1 and AHRS 1 failures. We declared an emergency with ATC and notified dispatch. We also alerted the Flight Attendant who then informed the passengers. We complied with all AOM-1 and FM-1 policies and procedures and the flight landed safely at without further incident. [Report narrative contained no addition information.] Aircraft experienced failure of the attitude and heading reference system resulting in multiple failures in flight dynamic subsystems.
Aircraft: B757
Phase of flight: Taxi
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Upon arriving at the gate in LHR; the Captain taxied in on centerline. The proper indications of B757-200 were displayed. Initially it was working properly guiding the centerline control. About half way to the gate from the service road it posted 'SLOW' and otherwise seemed normal. The Captain slowed but the indication never changed. At the point at which we all expected to see the countdown from 15 miles; it seemed delayed. Given that at some gates the nose of the plane comes quite close to the terminal it did not immediately raise an alarm to us that we had gone too far. As the Captain slowed further due to the 'SLOW' indication; we saw movement by a ground worker toward an emergency panel. It got all of our attentions and we commented on it. The ground person hit the emergency stop button and we stopped. We were told we had traveled 25 feet beyond the normal stop point and the left engine stopped within 3 feet of hitting the jetway. They left the aircraft in position to investigate further why the automated park had malfunctioned. While coming inbound I was never able to determine which stop line was ours; so I did not have an additional point of reference to establish better situational awareness. The Captain had stated that he had never been to Heathrow. An EGLL gate auto-stop parking system failed so that a ground worker had to command a B757-200 emergency stop to prevent an engine from contacting the jetway.
Aircraft: CRJ200
Phase of flight: Descent
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT

While we were descending; the Controller told us to turn to 345; descend to four thousand one hundred. The First Officer read that back. I set those numbers. We started our turn and continued our descent. Then at about 6;500 FT the Controller asked if we were descending to 6;000 FT. I leveled off. The pilot not flying (First Officer) said that we were assigned four thousand one hundred. The Controller told us to stop at 6;000 FT. Shortly after that we received a GPWS. We had already started a climb; so we were complying with the GPWS. We were vectored onto the ILS. The rest of the flight was uneventful. There was a communication breakdown. An altitude was either given incorrectly or heard incorrectly. We both thought that we heard 4;100 FT. In talking about it post flight; we wondered if the confusion could have come from the call sign getting jumbled with the altitude and the heading. On descent we were told to turn left to a 345 heading and to descent to 4;100 FT. On descent around 6;500 FT; approach asked what altitude we were descending to. We responded with 4;100 FT. At 6;000 FT; they asked our altitude and told to maintain 6;000 FT. During level off we received a GPWS alert. We responded to the alert and landed without any other issues. Threat/error in this flight is a possible readback error; or an incorrect descent altitude was given. The pilots of CRJ-200 were descending to an altitude that they believe they were cleared by ATC. ATC questioned the altitude and the crew received a GPWS alert. The crew leveled off and continued the approach to a normal landing.
Aircraft: CITATIONJET (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Phase of flight: Initial Climb
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance

Received/copied clearance for Fresno Eight; as filed. Misunderstood the spelling of the first fix: it was actually FRAME. Inserted incorrect FRANE and made initial turn out of traffic in the wrong direction.Problems:MiscommunicationFailed to check the waypoints in the FMS.Did not have two pilots present to hear and copy the clearance.Did not have two pilots verify the flight plan.Two instructors in the airplane led to complacency! Pilot used wrong fix on departure causing the aircraft to turn in the wrong direction. Pilot misunderstood fix name in clearance and did not realize it.
Aircraft: COMMERCIAL FIXED WING
Phase of flight: Parked; Taxi
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct

During boarding Family A was sent down to aircraft not wearing face covering. Passengers were asked the age of the child at the entry door and stated 3 years old. Passenger stated at the doorway she had the child's mask in her purse and would put it on at their seat location; I apologized and stated the mask would need to be on the child before boarding the aircraft. Family A then stepped out on the Jetway; pulled the mask out and said it would be difficult getting the child to wear and keep the mask on. I wanted to have the passengers go back up and speak with customer service; but thought they would comply. As other passengers were boarding; Family A followed behind; I did not notice they had not put the mask on the child.After we completed the safety briefing and doing the walk through; Family A were sitting with the child; had not placed the mask on the child; mother had placed the mask back in her purse. I apologized again and stated she would need to put the mask on child. Captain had signaled for takeoff. I also mentioned to the parents the Captain wanted to go back to the gate and I told them I did not want to go back to the gate. The mother tried to put the mask on the child; the father tried; then stated he wanted to give her some medicine that would make her go to sleep. I informed the Captain what was going on and of our progress; Captain made the call to go back to the gate. Several managers met the aircraft. Family A was asked to deplane. Air Carrier Flight Attendant reported a family was removed from the flight because their 3 year old child would not wear a face mask.
Aircraft: MD-88
Phase of flight: Initial Climb
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter

I cleared a BE36 for takeoff [Runway] 33L; then later a MD88 off [Runway] 27. The 27 departure turned to 235 heading per the SID and I had anticipated the turn and assigned the BE36 a 290 heading; eventually this aircraft needed to go south behind the MD88. I had both aircraft in sight; the MD88 was ahead of the BE36 and I turned the BE36 to a 210 heading. This aircraft was climbing to 3;000 FT and the MD88 was out of 3;000 FT and ahead of the BE36's projected track. The pilot of the BE36 later claimed that I 'took (him) right through the wake turbulence of that aircraft.' Maybe I could have issued the traffic to the BE36 but it was not needed in my opinion. Tower Controller described an alleged wake turbulence event when turning a light aircraft through the path of a previous departing air carrier. The light aircraft claimed ATC took him through the wake.
Aircraft: CRJ900
Phase of flight: Parked
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

After shutdown at the gate our FAA Inspector ride along asked a question about our right window which had an approximately 4 inch round hazy or milky looking blemish in the upper rear corner. I had not even noticed it prior to him mentioning it; probably due to having just gotten on the jet and taking over from the previous captain with all the things going on and with the inspector there the whole time. Anyway I explained that those types of blemishes were not a question of integrity of the window and that that one was really not obstructing the view where it was. I was sure it must have been there a long time and did not even really think of it as a maintenance related item. The inspector said nothing further. Of course as I was driving home I reflected on the event and decided to ask Maintenance Control. They said they would look into it. The next morning I again called Maintenance Control and was told they were ferrying the aircraft home and would be changing the window. I was surprised but also concerned that it was that big a deal and I had not thought it would be. I imagine I need to be more concerned about anything and everything. Even the things that seem to be mostly normal like the clouding in the window could potentially be cause for concern. Sometimes even things I would really never question could be enough to concern us all. Maybe what I think is common sense really is not. Call Maintenance Control on the spot for anything another airman or inspector questions. Never think you know things. I guess empires have fallen because people believed wrong assumptions. I never want myself or the company to be one of those. After landing a side window delamination was pointed out. I believed that it was within tolerances and had been checked out by Maintenance. After we left the airport the Captain thought more about it and called Maintenance Control from his home. The plane had already left and was in a new destination. Contract Maintenance was called and found the delamination to be out of limits. I was told the aircraft was ferried back to base.I assumed that the delamination was within limits because I was used to seeing similar ones in the same spot on other aircraft. I frankly didn't even notice it as it was in the far rear position of the side window. I believe that I was so used to seeing similar defects in that spot I didn't think to research the item. After having it pointed out I should have researched the item and had Maintenance called to verify. CRJ-900 flight crew reports being questioned by an FAA Inspector after gate arrival about an opaque area on the right side window; which the Captain does not think is significant and makes no logbook entry. The inspector makes no comment but the Captain contacts maintenance later; and the aircraft is taken out of service at a down line station.
Aircraft: B737
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Aircraft came in on a through trip with [a maintenance alert] assigned for #2 main tire worn. When installing gear pins; I found exposed cords on #1; #2; [and] #4 main tires. My partner was [retrieving a replacement] tire for assigned [maintenance alert] tire. I sent him to get the 2 additional tires while I jacked the aircraft and began removal of #1 [and] #2 tire assemblies. Found that all 3 replaced tires came from the shop significantly under-inflated. We just barely completed work before end of our shift; without delay to flight. Maintenance Technician reported finding replacement tires severely underinflated from shop.
Aircraft: B757
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

ATC warned us of moderate turbulence beginning in 20 minutes. We seated the passengers and flight attendants prior to that time. Without any warning; we encountered a rapid increase of airspeed of about 40 knots. Max speed was noted at .864 mach; 340 KTS. I immediately pulled the power to idle; the overspeed continued for about 20 seconds. I began a slow climb to bleed off speed. We gained less than 200 FT then went back to FL370. In seconds; the plane went from 310 KTS to 220 KTS. I increased thrust to the firewall and there was no increase of speed for about 10-15 seconds. We initiated a descent; with ATC clearance; to get back speed and at that time encountered moderate turbulence. We were in smooth air during the over/under speed and we are confident that no structural damage occurred. Many messages were exchanged between Dispatch and Maintenance; the decision was made to continue to destination. After stabilized; we attempted to locate the buffet speed chart in the manual on our Ipad's. It took me three attempts to login (error message about no wi-fi signal) and a total of more than 5 minutes to get to the performance section. No amount of searches could locate the appropriate document via the search function. I finally searched page by page in the performance chapter and found it. The use of the Ipad is not intuitive and would be vastly improved had I received instruction when given the Ipad. B757 Captain reports encountering a mountain wave at FL370 which initially causes an over-speed and slight climb then an under-speed with a requested descent to regain speed with maximum power set. Difficulties finding performance information in the iPad are also reported.
Aircraft: A320
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

At FL270; started to become aware of a strong noxious odor in the flight deck. Symptoms included headache and stinging eyes. Flight attendants reported the same in the cabin. Landed in ZZZ without incident. Grounded the aircraft and crew was met by paramedics. Cleared by paramedics with all showing good vitals. Released as per Dispatch. During the cruise portion of the Flight; the airplane had a foul; noxious odor. I had noticed my eyes were beginning to burn and I was starting to get a sinus type headache. The captain called me and asked if the plane had a foul smell and I said it did. He asked if the FA's were having any symptoms. I talked with the C and the B and relayed to the captain that all three of us had burning eyes; dull headaches; sinus pain; and ear pain. The captain and first officer were experiencing similar symptoms. As the flight progressed; the symptoms began to worsen and we also began feeling nauseous and dizzy. Before landing; the B fa began having blurred vision. The passengers were also complaining of a foul odor on the plane. One passenger was feeling ill but he declined needing any medical assistance. The flight was moderately turbulent and he was feeling nauseous. It should also be noted; we were only able to serve for approximately 15 minutes before the captain had us discontinue our service and sit down due to turbulence. After landing and deplaning; the paramedics were called to assess the flight crew. Our next flight on that plane was canceled and the crew went to the hotel for the night. A320 Captain becomes aware of a strong noxious odor on the flight deck at FL270. The flight attendants are called and report the same. The crew elects to continue the short flight to the destination airport.
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

Due to the severity of the weather and the quick changing conditions; our attention to detail was off. For myself; after a nearly 100 hour month and an early show time to end a trip; I was more tired than initially realized and my attention to detail suffered. Early morning departure out of ZZZ with an XA:00 show time. Aircraft was iced up due to weather. After getting Type 1 and 4 applied we began our taxi out to the runway. Bleeds and packs were turned on prematurely and due to the obvious smell of anti-ice fluid; I turned them back off. In the transition from de/anti-ice to our taxi out; the snow intensified and winds went from variable to gusting about 30 kts. Both sets of eyes were outside for the taxi and as we approached the runway we ran taxi and before takeoff checklists. Due to the inclement weather our attention was on that and the bleeds and packs were left off. We take the runway and set up for a static takeoff. As we are accelerating through 80 kts; we get messages associated with anti-ice inop/fail due to the bleeds being off. Captain takes control; we abort not yet knowing what the issue was. As soon as we clear the runway we both look up and realize what the problem was; run the appropriate checklists and continued thereafter. No further issues for the remainder of the flight to ZZZ1.With regard to any phase of flight; double checking is never a bad idea. With inclement weather and/or during times that any crew member may be tired; it is even more imperative to slow down and make sure that the aircraft and crew are on the same page. EMB-145 First Officer reported forgetting to switch bleed air and packs on before departure; resulting in an aborted takeoff.
Aircraft: CESSNA 310/T310C
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types

This event was during a Commercial Multiengine add rating flight test in a C310. We were issued a normal takeoff clearance from the Tower Controller. The applicant taxied on to the runway and stopped briefly to increase the engine power to check the engine instruments per the POH Take-Off Checklist. The Tower Controller came on the radio and yelled 'GO;GO;' so the pilot started an immediate takeoff roll and at approximately 150 FT AGL and 4;000 FT down the runway the Tower Controller instructed him to turn left immediately. Shortly thereafter the Tower Controller reprimanded the pilot for the brief pause on the runway and I told the Controller he should have told the pilot 'no delay' if he needed an immediate takeoff. The Controller instruction to make an immediate left turn over a densely populated area at 150 FT was unsafe and in violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations. This is not the first time this Controller has caused unsafe situations because he failed to maintain minimum separation distances. I would suggest the Tower Supervisor review the tapes while this controller is on duty and take corrective action. C310 Flight Examiner takes exception to the Tower Controller's handling of his examinees aircraft after issuing a takeoff clearance during a checkride.